Rob

and the reverse. Look at the loop of the P and the amount of internal space is minimal on yours.

Looks iffy to me. Compared with mine the letters are far too thick even allowing for the high points worn nearly flat.

If you want detailed info then you have to accumulate a large number of papers/books, each covering a short period in time. Books tend to be written about a reign or a type, so a suitable example of one publication for the period you are interested in would be D F Allen's book on the Tealby coinage published in 1951. Won't come cheap though. If you look through the intro sections in Spink it lists the useful references for that particular period. The lists aren't exhaustive, but are a good start.

Could the 8 be over a misplaced 1? i.e. started the date too far to the right. I would have thought it was a bit late for such things as I think the mint were only adding the last two digits by hand at this point, but it looks a bit regular for a flaw and it is difficult to see how an 8 punch could give this appearance.

You have punched letters or numbers into the die. This produces an inherent weakness at the junction with untouched metal because you have effectively disrupted the stable lattice structure. This will allow accelerated flaw development or chemical attack along the stress lines. You often see thin line flaws along the bases or tops of punched in characters.

It looks like the 8 might have been punched to high originally, and then re-punched lower, to make it in alignment with the other characters..... Go with that

They are from different dies, so any coincidental agreement between the flaws is just that. The unclear one might be a 6 too given the trace of top loop, but I'm not totally convinced given the lack of LHS for a 6. The initial reaction was an underlying 7, but the angle is very badly aligned if this is the case. Again, not convincing.

This must inevitably play its part. Collectors like lists to tick off. It doesn't make much difference what the source is as long as there is some goal to aim for.

You don't have to collect the varieties. For every nerd there are far more people who just want an example of each date.

The Frome hoard of 52000 Roman was kept intact, though I suspect there will be displays carved out of the total holding. The recent Buckingham find too. Sometimes they are kept in one place, sometimes they are shared around. The only consistent thing is that they are/will be kept away from the public and collectors. A lot of museums don't have anyone to look after the coins, they just fester in a shoebox or three. Blackburn museum is a good case. The Hart bequest in 1945 gave them some really choice and/or rare coins including Montagu's Petition Crown, but the collection languishes. In fact there isn't even a sylloge of it to put down on paper what is present in the collection. The idea that they are kept for the nation is a little disingenuous as there isn't sufficient spare manpower within the various museums to provide an overseer if a member of the public wants to have a look. There isn't even sufficient numbers to answer emails. When I wrote the article on the Weyl patterns, only the BM responded to an enquiry regarding any examples in their possession. Don't expect any answers unless you use Freedon of Information.

Hm. That's quite interesting. It is very open to abuse if anyone can edit the articles though. Might try later if it will let me.

I'm not putting you down for being youthful. No.1 kid is 29, no.4 is 22. ie. the older kid is older than you (?). Both are frighteningly conversant with all things internet, as I get the feeling you are too True. I can't disagree with that. It is just that every time I look at Wiki by chance, I see so many glaring errors that it is misinformation. The average person has considerable faith in what is written in Wikipedia, so it should at least attempt to be right. It would help if the author was contactable, so at least in true eBay style you could plead with him/her to correct it - even if to no avail. Major errors in 3 out of less than 10 coin related pages viewed is not good. .

I think that happens more often than you realise. 'Sell a similar item' requires quite a few changes usually. It is also a good template for something completely different as you then don't have to keep typing in the same general blurb ad nauseum. Changes can be forgotten and the error missed.

Bet you they try to keep the hoard intact. It's bound to be considered treasure, so it may be that there will be no new material available. If they can keep 52000 Romans together, despite the condition, then the likelihood of them dispersing this lot is remote. William I PAXS pennies from the Beaworth hoard which changed the type overnight from rarest to commonest. Probably accounts for 95% of all known coins and as such the hoard list is a good proxy for absolute rarity of all dies. The Northumbrian Viking hoard at Cuerdale was later still in 1840. There will almost certainly be other examples

I don't mind banter, it's just that people brought up in the internet age have a different working mindset to those who had no option but to read books. On more than one occasion the reply to my question on this forum has been to use Google. It doesn't come as second nature. My kids read some books, and I'm sure others read them too, yourself included. I don't believe you can do without them. With a book on the shelf the information is always to hand whereas with the internet the search for information comes down to rankings. i.e. you may or may not find the article of interest 6 months down the line. It may have been removed, it may have been superseded, it is not permanent. I very much doubt there is a book on emoticons. I find the internet as big a minefield as eBay hence my reluctance to use it extensively. Many things that have been peer reviewed are subscription based which limits the amount of useful content. For every decent article, you then have the free for all that is Wikipedia, which for all its help has much content akin to a Swiss cheese. A couple of years ago I looked up three coin related definitions and found that two of them were way off, in fact one was the complete opposite of reality. Only the blissfully ignorant can afford to rely on Wikipedia, yet it is quoted on many occasions. Yesterday I happened to look at the definition of halfcrown to see what was written. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_crown_%28British_coin%29 This also scores highly on the inaccuracy front. In a little over 4 lines of description there are 4 clear mistakes. The box of 'facts' on the right hand side is full of omissions/mistakes too. Why bother getting people to write these things if there is nobody to check it and put it right. This is how misinformation is spread, and the complete freedom to publish anything and everything without any checks is why I have a problem with the internet culture. We all get things wrong, and as individuals on this forum we have the ability to rectify mistakes, but in the wider world this is rarely going to happen because nobody is beholden to anyone - see the thread on contacting eBay sellers to try and correct them for example. It's their listing, so they are right and everyone else is wrong. End of.

You're as bad as my kids. If in doubt, their first recourse is to Google too. You are also using a completely new language Having followed your advice I now know what it is, however, I can only conclude the internet is full of garbage. Why so many images of complete banality?

facepalm?? And if we get this, an index to help the fossils please.

If they are washers then you should only expect prices around melt unless obviously worth something as a rarity and only a handful of dealers would want it. Trust me when I say the world is full of coins in this condition, which by extension means they are difficult to shift as a collectable. I am offered kilos of this type of material every month. Much goes in the pot.

When I've listed 1913 varieties (including all 4) in the past nobody gave a damn with no bids even starting at a quid. Now, assuming they aren't in decent grade I just throw them into bulk lots or the pot for melting.

Any foreign shipments get hammered now since they set the insurance limit at £250. Take out separate cover?

This is on a par with the Indian gentleman, who incidently is still sending his daily email.

If it had been Zimbabwean dollars it would have made sense (and a bargain to boot), but I'm struggling to think of what nationality pound they are referring to.

Has it been cleaned? The light bouncing off the detail looks a bit reflective for my liking. If it has been cleaned then it could well have left a residue that has picked up the fingerprint.

Graham Dyer wrote a number of articles in the BNJ during the 1980s and 90s.

Not so easy to mix and match styles as I understand. I agree a list is adequate, but the tail mustn't wag the dog. Returns from coins far outweigh those from catalogues simply on volume. Catalogues are offered pretty much as an at cost service given the amount of work required for something that sells for a quid or two in many cases. I'll never get rich selling catalogues, so I have no inclination to illustrate them all. The reason they had an auction house banner was that it looked better than a blank page. If you click on the logo it will give the same description as I had previously with contents, number of lots, plates etc.